Its not just corruption. The US has deliberately created harder economic situations in many countries. Much of the current immigration is linked to NAFTA, a US sponsored treaty. Maybe instead of persecuting people, we should stop screwing around with other countries and then complaining about the results

NAFTA was designed to export labor to cheaper regions. Nafta was opposed here because the Unions couldn't control foreign labor markets. NAFTA also allows Mexico, and Canada to export goods to the U.S. with minimum tax, and tarifs. That situation causes the dollar to flood into mexico, and canada.

Even with the U.S. "screwing" around with other countries, there is SO MUCH corruption south of the border. Such corruption (created for and by those governments) is destroying economies and keeping foreign companies from investing in their country.

Not to mention that those same governments WANT illegal immigration to continue. They get rid of the poorest, most uneducated, the unemployed, and the indigenous. In return they gain billions of dollars in remitances. This is just another example of the U.S. being blamed for the problems of other countries.

(a) In general Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a State (or a political subdivision) for any postsecondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such a benefit (in no less an amount, duration, and scope) without regard to whether the citizen or national is such a resident. (b) Effective date This section shall apply to benefits provided on or after July 1, 1998.

Claim: "Yes, but children of undocumented workers should not be punished for what their parents did."

Response: Should America's citizen students be punished for the illegal acts of illegal-alien parents residing?"- Since when is the state government in the business of coming to the rescue of adults whose parents committed illegal or imprudent acts?- Those adult illegal aliens need to go back to mom and dad and hold them accountable.- In the case of Mexican adult illegal aliens, they can easily return to Mexico to receive a virtually free college education at the University of Mexico.

Even with the U.S. "screwing" around with other countries, there is SO MUCH corruption south of the border. Such corruption (created for and by those governments) is destroying economies and keeping foreign companies from investing in their country.

Not to mention that those same governments WANT illegal immigration to continue. They get rid of the poorest, most uneducated, the unemployed, and the indigenous. In return they gain billions of dollars in remitances. This is just another example of the U.S. being blamed for the problems of other countries.

I agree with you that the United States didn't create the corruption in a lot of these third world countries, I am not saying there are not connections, but to put the fault on the United States would totally change the way we put responsibility and blame on parties usually, such as saying the United States is to blame for corruption in countries like Mexico is like saying because I shop at Walmart I partly responsible for how they treat their employees, the analogy is not perfect, but hopefully people understand what I am getting at.

On the other hand, its not factually true that immigrants are the poorest, most uneducated, unemployed in their society, in fact the opposite tends to be true--generalizations about immigrants might get me in trouble because there are always exceptions, but generally immigrants tend to be of working age, maybe the most common age when they first immigrate is in their 20's, therefore they able to work, they usually are not the least educated and most poor as they almost never emigrate, at some point people give up home, its doubtful that hardly any long time Mexican beggars would ever emigrate, they probably have no skills and two they lost hope and the idea doesn't cross their mind. Finally, though a lot of immigrants might have been unemployed when they emigrated, probably most of them worked for measley wages and because they are young the trek north seems worthwhile to make a humane wage. For an older person, the trek north and the hardships that would be encountered, included cultural shock probably is worth the 5 or 10 years they could work in the U.S. Trust me, their native countries would trade the elderly who can't work any more and beggars who contribute nothing for the people who do emigrate.

(a) In general Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a State (or a political subdivision) for any postsecondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such a benefit (in no less an amount, duration, and scope) without regard to whether the citizen or national is such a resident. (b) Effective date This section shall apply to benefits provided on or after July 1, 1998.

Interesting I did not know about that statute. Its probably constitutional under the interstate commerce clause too, though somewhat ironically after the conservative revolution of states rights, you can't say for sure a court would find it constitutionally, but secondary education is closely enough tied to national economy that the odds are stacked that it would pass judicial review.

That said I think its a bad law, sometimes the national government should let the states make their own decisions. I have a feeling this law is not enforced though because unless they put a lot of resources into enforcing only the colleges and universities would know and they can't compel colleges and universities to enforce national law. Also I will have to look at the link to see if there are any enforcement provisions, the part quoted is just the law with no enforcement provision, thats not to say section b,c, or d doesn't have that though.

Its not just corruption. The US has deliberately created harder economic situations in many countries. Much of the current immigration is linked to NAFTA, a US sponsored treaty. Maybe instead of persecuting people, we should stop screwing around with other countries and then complaining about the results

NAFTA should have help Mexico, what happened was democracy got in the way, in 1998 people thought Mexico had the most to gain, well they didn't-why cause they have a weak democracy riddled with corruption, India and China have just beat them in the marketplace because they had authoritarian governments who were able to impose structural economic reform on their countries without even asking the people what they thought.---Thats one thing I didn't like about the Bush doctrine, its encouraged democracy everywhere though we all know that in certain situations like IRAQ, it might not be best-Mexico is another country that might have been better off in some ways if they were not slowed down by a weak democracy-I think democracies are possibly the best form of government over the long haul, but a weak democracy generally is not effective in a global economic marketplace.

I have an Ides. Instead of In-State Tuition for illegals. What if they just stayed home and we sent $50,000 per potential illegal to mexico. Then the pathetic criminals wouldn't have to leave thier homes and be surrounded by strangers. Infact we should protect thier rights to spend our money how they want so each one should get cash for school. We should send money for medical care as well.